The Anti-Esteem Tool Kit

The self-esteem tool kit consists of tools you can use to build your self-esteem. For instance, the wishing stick (or wand) reminds you that it's okay to think about what you want, instead of always deferring to the desires of others. Or, the thinking cap reminds you that it's okay to come to your own conclusions about what's going on in the world.

These tools all help you to raise your self-esteem, but there's another tool kit, one that helps you remember to put aside certain tactics that simply help you to maintain low self-esteem. Here's some examples:

The Bully Club: Low self-esteem people often think they can feel better if they hurt other people. Sometimes they think the Courage Stick is a form of bully club, but that's a mistake.

The Blame Pointer: Low-self esteem people are often found pointing the finger of blame at others.

The Blindfold: This tool enables a person to go through life not seeing anything they don't want to see.

The Earplugs: By plugging their ears, people are able to avoid hearing anything that might make them uncomfortable. Some Earplugs replace all sound with distracting music. Some just totally deafen to all sounds. Both the Blindfold and the Earplugs counteract the positive effects of the Golden Key, a tool that allows you to open any inquiry you're puzzled about.

The Nose Clamp: This double-duty tool keeps their wearer from remembering to breathe with their Oxygen Mask. It also prevents the wearer from smelling the stink that everyone else is aware of in a situation.

The Stupid Pill: A single one of these pills drugs one's mind to counteract the effects of wearing a Thinking Cap which would otherwise have you thinking as clearly as possible.

The Last Aid Kit: - Use this to bandage your wounds after agreeing to requests you can’t fulfil because you did not use your Yes/No medallion.

Do any of these tools remind you of any politicians you know?

So, what other anti-esteem tools do you have in your tool kit?

For more on the Self-Esteem Tool Kit, get yourself a copy of More Secrets of Consulting: The Consultant's Tool Kit.

https://leanpub.com/moresecrets

Why I'm a native American

I don’t know if I have any particular kind of ancestry, but I often claim to be “native American.”

Why? I do so when some institution is “surveying” so-called-race, which is a bogus concept to begin with. See 

Man's Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race, by Ashley Montagu.

People say I should choose “White,” but I’m definitely not white. My skin is pinkish yellow, or yellowish pink, and it grows red and brown when I’m out in the sun. I can’t imagine why its color would be important to anyone, except maybe a fashion consultant.

So, when surveyed, I choose “native American (small n)” because I was definitely born in America, so I’m a native. It’s a protest. I would be proud to be a Native American (capital N), but as far as I know, I have no such ancestry.

An interesting sidelight. Years ago when the university insisted I make a “race” choice, they assured me that the information was completely confidential. A year later, when I returned from a trip out of town, I found a note on my desk from Russell Means, a prominent Native American who had visited the university.

I wondered why he would write a personal note to me, until I found out that the administration had sent him to see me, their token “Native American Professor.”

So much for confidentiality. So much for the trustworthiness of bureaucrats.

In such a world, I shall remain “native American,” and I hope Elizabeth Warren and other smart people follow my example. 

Improving as a software developer

The question was posed: "What could I do to improve/advance on software development?" Here's what I answered:

There are many things you can do to improve, and I’m sure you’ll get some good answers. From my point of view, however, there is one thing to do that underlies all the other suggstions:

Never pretend you know what you don’t know.

Always be ready to ask for help in learning new things.

You may think you have to look extra smart and experienced to land a good job, but it’s quite the opposite. Just show your willingness and eagerness to learn.

Some people might not value this approach, but they’re not people you want to associate with. They’re probably pretenders themselves. They're certainly not Agile developers.

Where Do Bad Managers Come From?

On a recent flight out of Chicago, I found myself seated next to Jack, a IT manager in a medium-sized company. Jack was on his way to interview for the IT manager in a larger corporation. He explained that he had reached the limit of his present job, and his only chance to advance himself was with a company with a larger organization.

"Why don't you stay with your present organisation and move into general management?" I asked.

"That was my goal when I took this job three years ago," Jack said, "but there's not a chance. The president of the company sees me as a technical specialist, lacking skills to become a 'real' executive. So I'm looking for someplace else, where I'll be appreciated."

"But three years isn't a very long time with one company," I said. "Perhaps they don't feel you've had enough time to prove yourself to them."

"I've done a lot for them in three years, but they don't appreciate how much work it takes to manage in the present crisis environment."

"What do you mean?"

Before I could hear his answer, one of the cabin attendants came by to ask for our choices for lunch. She beckoned the other attendant to come over and refresh our drinks. By the time all the fuss was over, we had our lunches, but I had forgotten their was an unanswered question still suspended between us. But Jack hadn't forgotten. He seemed eager to dump his woes on me while I picked at my sirloin tips.

"Technology is changing every month, and I can't find good people. It's impossible to keep a technical staff together long enough to make improvements in present systems, let alone keep up with the new technology. Junior programmers demand inflated salaries, and if they don't get them, they jump ship to some other company that is desperate enough to pay them. And senior programmers ..." He stopped talking and unrolled his cutlery.

"What about senior programmers?" I asked.

"Why talk about it?" Jack said bitterly. "There's no sense even thinking about hiring a senior person, let alone starting to search for one. You give them the moon, and a year later they want the sun. They seem to think they could get rid of us managers and run the place without us."

I could see why Jack was so bitter. In effect, he was being squeezed from both top and bottom. His management did not want to let him advance, and he felt the pressure of his own employees trying to advance up from below. Still, I had a hard time feeling sorry for Jack. I'm always suspicious of managers who speak badly of their employees.

I almost told Jack the Army saying: "There are no bad soldiers, only bad officers." Instead, I dipped the tiny spoon into my dessert custard. I had a feeling Jack wouldn't appreciate Army wisdom.

Of course Jack has problems with employees. But a manager's iob is to deal with such problems, so if Jack complains about bad people, he's telling me he's not doing his job. Jack says his people were leaving for better salaries, but salaries are roughly tenth on the list of reasons technical people switch jobs. The first reason they leave jobs is poor management. Probably the second and third reasons, too.

Jack himself was leaving his job because his own management did not understand him. They would not give him the opportunity he thought he deserved, nor would they guide him to the self-improvement he needed to advance his career.

Jack complained that his bosses never supported his requests for management training, but when I asked him about training his own people, he said: "Why invest in training them? They are going to leave before I get a return on my investment. My staff is turning over at a rate of 25 per cent a year. Technical people have no company loyalty whatsoever."

By changing jobs every three years, Jack himself was "turning over" at a rate of 33 per cent a year. His management, knowing that "technical people have no company loyalty," refused to take Jack's own executive aspirations seriously.

Jack, like so many IT managers, was locked in a "disloyalty cycle." His management did not take him seriously as a person, so he was not loyal to them. Because he was not loyal to them, they refused to take him seriously as a person. In his own career, Jack was modelling the problem he was having with his own staff.

Not every IT manager has Jack's problems. Some have broken the "disloyalty cycle," or stayed out of it in the first place. They are not panicked by the pace of technology, but insist on developing their own employees.

They may hire experienced people, but do not try to "buy" instant expertise. They know that the expertise they buy is more likely to be bought again by someone else. They have excellent technical staffs, with low turnover, but their pay scales are merely competitive, not exceptional.

Their employees tend to be loyal to their companies because they know their managers are also loyal to their companies. One of my clients has a IT manager who budgets a minimum of 20 days per year of training per employee, and woe to one of his managers who fails to reach that minimum for each employee. He does not "waste" this investment because most employees want to stay at a company that actively demonstrates loyalty to them. Sure he has some turnover, but around six per cent, rather than Jack's 25 per cent. Moreover, he tends to turn over the people he would rather lose, rather than the ones he would rather retain.

IT managers like Jack cannot have it both ways. If they want to become "real" executives, they will have to start acting like real executives. That means taking responsibility, rather than blaming their employees. It means developing good people, not trying to pirate them from other companies and then griping about how other companies are pirating from them.

But Jack does not have time to develop his employees. If he does not get promoted in three years, he will not be around to reap the benefits of his investment in them. He will be out looking for a new job that will show him more "loyalty."

"Real" executives take the long view. They are the kind of people who, at age 60, can be found planting trees. IT managers who think that fast moving technology requires short-term quick fixes are stuck in a middle management mentality. They will never become real executives.

Managing Yourself and Others

Learned Helplessness

My e-pal, L.M. May has written the most striking, useful blog post I've seen in a long time. L.M. says: "The following essay is about fiction writing and learned helplessness, ..." but L.M. "used to work in the software industry as a software tester," and so writes this essay with much the same qualifications I have—and combines the two main foci of this blog: writing and software creation. So, if you're a writer, or a software professional (or both), this essay is for you.

What is "learned helplessness," and what does it have to do with writing and software making? I'll leave the writing part to L.M., but I'd like to cover the software side briefly, before I send you off to read the essay, at:

http://lmmay.com/2011/04/03/fiction-writers-and-learned-helplessness/

L.M. quotes the Wikipedia definition, "Learned helplessness…means a condition of a human being or an animal in which it has learned to behave helplessly, even when the opportunity is restored for it to help itself by avoiding an unpleasant or harmful circumstance to which it has been subjected."

The essay was inspired by the reactions of some writers to the enormous technology-induced changes taking place in the publishing industry. (See, for example, my posts of Feb 27 and Feb 28, on this blog.) These writers had learned that the only real way to publish their books was the traditional way, as books printed on paper by a few large publishing companies. Mostly, they had put their entire business of writing in the hands of agents who dealt with these companies for them. Now, with e-publishing, they have an avenue for bypassing all those "helpers" (and their fat fees), but some of them, many of them, have learned to be helpless, and violently oppose the idea of standing on their own two feet as adults.

How does this relate to software professionals? If you really don't understand, I'm not sure I can explain it to you. To put it briefly and bluntly, have you ever allowed the "grown-ups" (the salespeople, the managers, the customers) to override your professional judgment because you felt helpless?

Did you ever agree to build some code in two months when you knew it would take at least five—and then silently take the blame when you made it in four?

Did you ever allow unqualified people to override your technical decisions, thinking you couldn't do anything about it?

Have you agreed to undertake testing software that was (to you) obviously unready for testing (or even patently untestable)?

Even if you've never experienced such events, have you ever watched others trapped by them, and not known how to help them?

If you know about such matters in your work, read L.M.'s essay about the psychology of learned helplessness, then come back here and be a voice in the conversation that follows.


And why here? LM explains:
"I keep my comments section off due to family and work commitments, but Dean Wesley Smith and Gerald M. Weinberg offered their blogs as sites where people could discuss this essay amongst themselves.  I will be checking in as often as I can to both their websites over the next few days to answer any questions."

I think we should divide the labor, with the writers' comments going to Dean's site (http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/) and the software people laying out their thoughts here. But you can choose where to hang out—both places, if you wish—and we'll see what comes of our sharing.

And, BTW, as you dig into this subject, you may want to try my ebook, Managing Yourself and Others, or at Amazon or Barnes & Noble.

How to Manage Teams Congruently

Typical crisis-provoking events in the life of a programming team are machine malperformance, machine overload, unyielding bugs in critical sections, difficulties in system testing of two unit-tested programs, schedule changes, arrival of new equipment, changes in higher-level management, and changes in specifications. No wonder it seems that crisis is the normal situation in the life of a programming team.


Two general social-psychological observations about group behavior are especially relevant to the crisis-ridden programming team. First of all, it has been observed that in a crisis, members of a group more readily accept relatively strong leadership attempts. At the same time, however, the group becomes less patient with would-be leaders if their direction does not produce effective solutions to group problems rather quickly. Thus, in a programming team—which is possibly in a continual crisis—leadership patterns may be in constant flux. Because of this reshuffling, the more difficult the task is, the more the team comes to follow those leaders who can actually steer the team most effectively.


We can see, then, why the democratic—or perhaps we should say "technocratic"—organization is such a natural one for a programming team. When selecting programmers for teams, we should try to choose people who will fit well within such a self-shifting structure—neither too dominant nor too passive. In training our programmers, we should try to teach them how to follow able leaders and how to grasp leadership opportunities when they themselves are the most qualified in the group. And during the life of a team, we should try—if we are on the outside—not to interfere in those democratic processes which, though seemingly traumatic for the team and its members, will in the long run lead to most effective team functioning.


Indeed, once the team is selected and operating, the wise manager placed above it will adopt a "hands-off" policy with regard to its internal structure and structure change. When, as so often happens, team members come to him to lend an authoritative opinion on their side of some argument, he would do well to follow the pattern of the old rabbi who was sitting in his study one day when an obviously agitated man came to see him. The man told him a long story about an argument just concluded with his wife. When he finished his story, he insisted that the rabbi tell him whether he or his wife had been right.


"You're right," said the rabbi, and the man left the house beaming. Soon, however, the man's wife appeared—even more distraught than the man had been.


"What do you mean," she insisted, "saying that my husband was right? You haven't heard my side of the story." And she proceeded to relate her side, finishing with a demand for a new judgment.


"You're right," said the rabbi, and the wife left satisfied. The rabbi's own wife, however, was not satisfied, for she had overheard both stories and both answers.


"How can you do that?" she demanded. "You told the husband that he was right and the wife that she was right. They can't both be right."


"You're right," said the rabbi.

[This little tale is adapted from my books: The Psychology of Computer Programming and Managing Teams Congruently.]

Attendance Too Regular? Try This!

Inspired by Ajay Balamurugadas's blog at

http://enjoytesting.blogspot.com/2010/08/aware-of-other-side-of-your-application.html

The title was Enjoy Testing

which starts with:

"For the past few months, I left office at sharp 6 p.m. I felt I should not invest more hours just because someone's estimate was wrong. So, I always took the 6 p.m. cab to home instead of the 8 p.m. or 10 p.m. cab."

And Michael Bolton commented:

"...I perceive that resolution to the trickiest part of the problem starts with recognizing people."

Michael is right. It starts with people. And guess who is the first person to recognize?

Yourself, of course.

The very first thing that struck me about the (quite fine) post was the regularity with which you come and go to work. Ordinarily, such regularity is a highly valued trait. For example, people can count on knowing when you'll be there and when you won't. Very good contribution to communication--and thus very high on every tester's list.

However, as an experienced tester, you already know that too regular, too predictable, behavior is a way to miss a great many bugs--and that's true of the regularity in attendance, too.

I would suggest you come in a couple of hours early on some random day next month, and (on a different day, probably) leave quite late. And, if you have people who work night shifts, arrange to be around for one or two of those.

I probably didn't have to explain why, but some of Ajay's readers may be less experienced than others. Experienced testers can probably all tell stories of when they came in early or left late (or were somewhere they weren't usually expected to be, or even prohibited to be) and because of that noticed something that led to a bug they never would have seen otherwise. (Perhaps something they were totally unaware of.)

I myself can tell many such stories, including one that may well have saved astronauts' lives, so I regularly practice being somewhat irregular in my behavior as a consultant (yes, I know that's a paradox).

The Consultant's Money-Back Guarantee

On LinkIn, recently there was a question about what a client had to do to hire a consultant who wouldn't rip them off, just taking money for no measurable result. In my response to the question, I wrote:

I make this easy for my clients by two principles of my consulting business:

1. At the end of every consulting visit, I ask them to evaluate the worth of my contribution. If it's not worth more than they paid me, we either adjust what I'm doing or we terminate the relationship.

2. If they don't feel what I've done is worth what they've paid, they can have their money back, no questions asked. I make sure they know this up front--though I've never had to give back their money.

If a consultant doesn't give you both these things, don't hire them.

Why Give Their Money Back?

Pradeep Soundararajan wrote, in response:

While anything that any human does is a heuristic, why should a consultant want to give back the money for the client not happy with what the consultant influenced?

For instance, I go in as a Consultant to solve a problem. At the end I help the client understand that there is more investment he ought to do in order to ship the product. The client feels unhappy because he hired me thinking that I would help him ship the product with existing budget.

Maybe what I did is what other good consultants might have done, so should I return his money back because he feels disappointed?

Why? Because it's your job to satisfy the client. That's what they pay you for. If you buy a laptop from Apple or Dell or HP and when you try to use it, it doesn't work, don't you expect to get your money back? If you don't, would you ever buy a computer from Apple or Dell or HP again? So, one reason to offer a money-back guarantee is to develop future business with that client.

Another reason is to keep that client from spreading bad news about you to 16 other potential clients. (That's what people do when they feel they were cheated by a vendor. When they feel they got a good value, they tend to tell only three other people.)

The Steering Wheel and Brakes

For my consulting assignments, this guarantee acts like a combination of steering wheel and brakes. It guarantees that the client and I will pause periodically and see if we're going in the right direction. If we're not, we can use the steering wheel to change course, or in extreme cases, just apply the brakes and end the assignment.

Would you drive a car without a steering wheel and brakes? Then why would you want to take on a consulting assignment without them?

I guess maybe you wouldn't want them if all you wanted was a runaway car, one that somehow kept paying you as it careened away toward a fatal crash. If cash flow is the only reason someone is in the consulting business, I hope they hit that wall as soon as possible. People like that give my profession a bad name, and thereby hurt a great many ethical and effective consultants.

Don't get me wrong. I think money is a fine reason for being a consultant, but not if it's the only reason. I want to get paid for my work, but only if I'm actually helping people. I don't want to be a fraud.

What Is Value?

But perhaps the most important reason to offer this guarantee is to force them, and you, to think about what value means to each of you.

Pradeep goes on to say: I think such traps have to be cleared before a Consultant gets in by asking questions like, "What value means to you?" and "Can you think of things that you'd be disappointed to know at the end of this assignment?" and "Do you have insight about any kind of information that could cause you nightmares?"

Well, yes, of course you want to clear this up before you go in, but that's not always possible. People often don't know in advance what they want. They only know when they see it. Many of my clients ask for one thing when I come in, but through my consulting learn that they really wanted something else that was more valuable.

To take an extreme case, at one client, the man who invited me in to help with strategic planning learned that his alcoholism was tearing his own organization apart, and what he needed to do was fire himself and go into treatment. That wasn't what he asked for at the beginning of the assignment, but by the end, he knew that this result was far, far more valuable. I asked him if he wanted his money back (he was part owner of the company) and he said no. In fact, he wanted to pay me more--but I refused. I did my job (helping his company improve), and I earned my pay. That was enough for me.

What If Every Consultant Did This?

Pradeep then says:

Not every consultant would want to return back the money and that could be a good marketing stint or building credibility or a distinguishing factor but if every consultant does that ( which is not an easy thing ) then it might end up causing confusion of whom to pick.

Pradeep is right. It's not an easy thing. In fact, it's so unlikely that it's not worth worrying about.

But, if a lot of consultants used these principles, maybe there wouldn't be so many derogatory jokes about our profession of consulting.

Intelligence Isn't Enough

Pradeep then concludes:

An intelligent client picks an intelligent consultant and that's a heuristic, too.

Well, yes, that's certainly a heuristic, and a necessary one. But not by any means a sufficient one. Intelligence without ethics is like a biological weapon in the hands of a terrorist. Very powerful, to be sure, but you'd much rather not have it on your premises.

How Can You Recognize Alcoholism in a Service Provider?

Jeff wrote: "Do you have a specific test for that [alcoholism in service providers]? Many of the alcoholics I've known hid their problem well, at least for some period of time."

Good question, and one I couldn't answer at the time. After being placed in jeopardy with the government as a result of Provider's actions, I began to study the problem with great interest. Here are some signs I now recognize that I didn't pay attention to at the time:

Late for Appointments and Missing Deadlines

This one I definitely noticed, but didn't recognize the possible significance. I just told myself that Provider was a person who was "habitually late." Like many of the other signs, lateness could be attributed to many things besides alcoholism, so I let it pass without comment.

Depression and Mood Fluctuations

Again, I noticed this, but didn't appreciate the possible significance. I believe I thought, "Well, such providers aren't the most sparkling of personalities." Actually, my next provider proved even that assumption wrong. She's terrific.

Mistakes

Everybody makes mistakes, and I tend to be pretty generous in allowing for them. Some of Provider's mistakes were hidden, and that was my fault for not having a reasonable feedback mechanism. But I had noticed a rather higher level of mistakes than I'd like to see in a provider, and I just let it pass.

Personal Problems as Excuses for Mistakes and Lateness

Provider was never short of excuses for mistakes and lateness. Health, problems at home, "the dog ate my calendar"--he was very creative.

Choosing Lunch Dates in Drinking Places

I didn't have lunch with Accountant very often (taking lunch alone may be another sign), but looking back, I realize that he always insisted on restaurants that had a bar.

Showing Up Intoxicated

I never noticed this with Provider, but in subsequent years, I've noticed it with other service people. Whether they're alcoholics or not, this is unacceptable. For example, someone operating a power lawnmower when drinking is a risk to his life and limb--and to my entire business if he sues me for cutting off his foot while working for me.

Health Problems

Anybody can have health problems--I'm a prime example. But someone who is consistently coming down with one misery after another might be showing symptoms typical of alcoholics. Same is true for frequent injuries and accidents. But, of course, they might just be a natural klutz.

Speaking affectionately about Drinking

I should have recognized this one, for my mother was an alcoholic. She often spoke lovingly about her Southern Comfort. Provider's drink of choice was different, but he seemed to have the same love affair. Affairs, really. He loved 'em all.

Signs, not Proof

None of these signs prove that someone is an alcoholic. They could be signs of other things--other addictions or something quite innocent. But my job is not to prove some provider is an alcoholic, which can be incredibly difficult. Alcoholics are experts at denial, rationalization, dreaming up excuses, blaming others, manipulating you, or hooking into your caretaker needs. Besides, their alcoholism is none of your business.

Your Responsibility

What is your business is your business. You hire a provider to do a particular service. If they don't do that service well enough, it's your responsibility to replace them, not to make excuses for them. And especially not to fix them. Set performance criteria. Communicate those criteria. Observe performance relative to those criteria, and take action when performance doesn't measure up. Why it doesn't measure up is not your job.

I didn't do those things with Provider, so I got snagged into his drinking problem. It was his problem, but it was my responsibility to protect myself. I now do a better job of fulfilling my responsibilities as a business owner. Overall, I've protected myself not just from alcoholism, but from other problems that are not my problems.

But She's My Friend

Does this sound heartless and cold? Maybe you're good friends with your service provider? Can you treat your friends like this?

To take just one example, I had a copy editor who had trouble getting to work in a timely manner. We have flexible working hours, but I couldn't depend on her for any schedule. Turns out, she was not an alcoholic, but was depressed over her mother's death three years earlier. She tended to sleep 12 or 14 hours a day. After causing me to miss an important mailing deadline one afternoon, she said, "Oh, if you need me and I'm not here, you can just call me and wake me up."

Not my job. Not as her client. I replaced her with an editor who could wake herself up.

Then, as a friend, not a client, I helped the copy editor find a really good therapist. Just as I helped Provider fulfill his AA twelve steps. It turns out, if you want to help people with such personal problems, it's easier if you're not hiring them to do a job.

Developing Emotionally, Part 3

William Responds to Melissa:

Melissa, my secret is this: I have learned to really enjoy interaction on the emotional level. Perhaps "being emotional" was an innate need, but before and during high school I only had 2 close friends (ever), and I was very controlled–I didn't let anything out (if I could help it). Then I had a life-changing experience: I went to a summer program for high-ability science students, and the program director wanted to develop our little personalities as well as our big brains! So he included a simulation–we were stranded (in groups of 8) on a desert island, and had to solve all sorts of problems, which grew more and more personal. I was lucky enough to land in a very supportive group where we related to each other on a very personal and emotional level...and I was hooked! I realized that personal interaction needed to be a part of my life.

This experience really was life changing. For example, it resulted in my changing my college goal to a small liberal arts college instead of the US Naval Academy. And it resulted in my adding a second major to my academic program, Psychology as well as Computer Science. But the experience itself was relatively simple: 16 4-hour sessions over a period of 8 weeks.

Since that time, I have participated in a number of self-development groups, of all flavors. I have worked to develop my consulting skills and my counseling skills (quite related!). And this stuff is learnable: it just requires practice. Perhaps I had an innate ability for empathy–I get it from my mother! But when I was in college, I participated in a basic training session for drug counselors (lay people, not professionals), and the model they used involved practicing empathy. For several hours a day. That's what got me started in that direction. And believe it or not, practicing this stuff really can help to improve your ability to detect and "process" signals that other people are sending out. At least, that has been my experience.

Today, I really enjoy relating to people as people. I find it most satisfying when I am in a situation where it is "permissible" to relate on an emotional level. (I admire Jerry W., who seems to be able to establish this permission in almost any situation!)

So, I guess my secret was participating in a number of self- development exercises in "safe" situations, where I could take more and more risks and learn to enjoy being more open. I have done this at various times over the past years, and even PSL counts in this direction, because it shows you your emotional limits and helps you to realize what you might need to work on.

Like I said, I don't know if this helps, but it is my story...

Forest Responds to William's Story:

I am so grateful that you shared this story with everyone. It was wonderful to read, and allowed me to feel a number of things that I had recently closed off again.

I identify with how you are most comfortable when you can relate emotionally in a situation. I used to struggle more than I do now in balancing my desire to relate emotionally, with what those around me were comfortable with–or, perhaps it is what I perceived the situation to allow. In the 'professional' world, I have perceived that emotions are frowned upon, and that people are to keep them out of the office. My inclination is to balance emotion with the rest, but I tended to lock them up in many situations.

At my first AYE conference, I learned that the emotional aspect is necessary to connect with people. And notably, that it was okay. During that experience I allowed myself to be more open in connecting with people and to be myself emotionally. I prefer to operate in an environment like that, so I give myself permission to create environments in my life where I am able to (work included). I feel like my true self when I am able to, almost like the mask comes off. I have found the AYE and PSL communities to be extremely supportive and safe in this realm. Which is why I keep going back... I can be myself, and I can recharge my energy to continue to be myself in my day-to-day life.

And William Replies to Forest:

Thanks very much for the affirmative feedback. It is music to my ears, balsam for my soul, etc.! [The writers among you are cringing at the cliches, I'm sure... :-) ]

Theoretically, the workplace is devoid of emoitions. But in real life, that's never the case. And in fact, emotions often have a much higher effect on productivity than almost anything else. I really enjoyed my 5-year stint as an internal consultant, because one big part of consulting skills is being aware of your own emotions and (trying to) understand what is triggering them. It is almost always something in the current situation. Identifying that cause can often lead to a breakthrough in consulting. My favorite book about this is "Flawless Consulting" by Peter Block, which has a prominent place on my bookshelf, right near "The Psychology of Computer Programming." And acting as a consultant, you (often) have permission to name or surface those underlying emotions in one way or another. In fact, sometimes that is your #1 job.

Many management trainings also concentrate on identifying your emotional reactions and using those in the workplace. It is often more OK to be yourself than we realize. In fact, sometimes openness is what is needed to break a "logjam". But I agree, for many people this is very unexpected, and it is a risk to be the first to try it.

Perhaps you can give yourself permission to establish yourself as a "whole person" in your new job, able to relate to your new colleagues and employees as a real and open person. I must admit, I am not currently doing that in my job! So I don't claim it's easy. But perhaps it can be done. (Then again, on the other hand, I just recently read an article from a German psychologist that claimed that being open and authentic is career suicide, and that the guys who get ahead are the ones who manipulate the best! In my cynical moments, I believe this might be true, but I prefer to ignore it...)

Jerry Comments

If this is what "getting ahead" requires, I would question whether it's really "ahead" at all. You might make more money, and have more authority to order people around (which they'll ignore as best they can), but you're really falling back. And, for a consultant, "ahead" and "up" are not synonyms anyway.

In any case, whatever direction you want to travel, studying your emotional system and practicing to improve your understanding of it—those are keys for most consultants to improve their effectiveness. The emotional system is your priority analyzer. Without it, you don't know what's important. And with it, if you don't know how to understand it, you'll act like a robot who doesn't understand the difference between the important and the trivial.

Developing Emotionally, Part 2

A client, let's call him Robert, who wishes to remain anonymous, writes about the body inventory:

"This was one of my key "lessons learned" from the Problem Solving Leadership workshop (PSL): acknowledging my feelings/emotions. As an INTP myself, this didn't make much sense at the time. :-)

Even though it was some years ago, I recall Jerry mentioning during PSL that INTPs have very fragile feelings which is why we need to protect them and appear to others as if we didn't have any.

After PSL I have been doing the exercise Jerry describes every morning at my desk in the office while writing in my journal. I close my eyes and write down what I feel. I just acknowledge it to myself on paper. In my case though, I don't start at my toes. I have learned that my emotions get trapped in 3 very specific places in my body: my stomach, my chest, and my throat. So, I just aim for those. If I listen closely, I hear what I am saying... emotionally. That helps me balance myself to begin my day at work.

In dealing with others, I also often find myself "not understanding why others feel the way they do". That is my trigger to stop trying to figure it out and just be. I am just there for the other person. I just acknowledge their feelings. I don't try to change them. Sometimes I catch myself not being able to do that. I realize that, in those situations, I am emotionally out of balance. I am trying to "fix" the other person when, in fact, what I really want is to balance myself."


I'm so glad he wrote this, for his experience is as a valuable model for others of how the body inventory works, and how working on yourself first helps you understand others.

And, how helping others helps you, for when I asked Robert for permission to use his feedback, he wrote:

Jerry, please go ahead and use it on the blog.I am already thinking that once I see it on on your blog, it will help me be less afraid of sharing my thoughts in a larger audience. I'll get there. :-)

And, it is already helping other people. Melissa wrote:

Robert, I appreciate you for your insights. I have discovered my emotions are showing up in my stomach mostly. I will have to check in with my chest and throat. My stomach has been tense during my situations and could overwhelm different bottlenecks elsewhere.

Your second description about being out of balance perfectly describes my situations as well. You phrased it better and more deeply than my current level of understanding. Thank you for those insights. Being centered myself helps me be more present for the other person. As my centering improves I even get better at meeting new people. :-)

I also like the idea of doing The Body Inventory at your desk. I tried it yesterday for the first time while lying down. I almost fell asleep. (Though maybe that is what my body really needed then.)

The post also elicited a profound and helpful comment from Doris Hernandez, a "life coach." I recommend my readers take a look at her blog, Building the Life You Want, as well.

Developing Emotionally

Melissa, a client, writes: "As you recall I got booted from my job when you were consulting here a while back. In the congruent model I was too self-oriented and neglected the needs of the Presidential Other and the Context. I recently exited another situation in similar fashion (but recognized the self-orientation problem right away). In my analysis I have discovered my INTP self has built a huge ability to work through and understand problems rationally and a minuscule ability to comprehend problems or situations emotionally. So far I realize I need to build emotional awareness, both of my self and of others. I think they go together. Seeing emotions in myself helps me see them in others. I think I also need more emotional problem skills. A friend pointed out humans are quite often irrational and I get confused trying to deal with those situations rationally. I guess I am looking for ways to develop emotionally. I appreciate any emotions or ideas that you and others are willing to share. Thank you."

I'd like my readers to post any help they can give to Melissa. Let me start by offering an exercise I found extremely useful in learning to perceive my own emotional state:

The Body Inventory

Sit down by yourself.

Close your eyes and mentally perform an inventory of your physical state.

Start with the tip of the big toe on your right foot. Is it feeling anything? Quiet? Itchy? Painful? What kind of pain?

Acknowledge the feeling, then move on to the next toe and repeat the process.

Finish your right toes, then do the left. Then do the parts of your feet, then your ankles and up your legs.

Continue the process up your body, inside and out, until you finish at the top of your head.

If you're pressed, the entire process can take as little as one minute, though if you can spare a couple of minutes, that would be better. You can almost always get a couple of minutes. For example, if I'm in a stressful client meeting, I ask for a health break and head for the men's room (in your case, Melissa, the ladies' room). I can hide out in a booth and perform the inventory. When I'm finished, I not only know my physical state (and perhaps something I want to do to improve it), but I usually have some insight into my emotional state and the emotional states of the others in the meeting.

Give it a try.

Any other suggestions?